Actually, it isn't just North America where this is an issue. For example, in India:
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/india-transgender-politician-who-ran-for-president-shot-dead/

My way of voting is based on pragmatism, protecting the law-abiding citizens and resources of this country on the long term and an understanding of human nature. Non-partisan by nature, I don't shy away from allying myself with any party that can shift things closer to where our own interests are preserved most effectively.

Your strictly partisan way of voting is based on your personal morals and intentions rather than outcome (especially long term), ignoring resources and ignoring human nature. Especially ignoring the fact that human nature has not changed a bit in the last couple thousand years. You want to social engineer that but you can't - no amount of aforementioned SJW fus ro dah will manage to do that.

Generosity functions if it's voluntary. What you propose is anti-liberal authoritarian socialism and due to your inability to place a limit to mass immigration and redistribution of wealth for fear of evoking painful "the boat is full" memories, there would be widespread civil unrest long before you could ever reach the hypothetical goal of equality you seek.

In other words, the society you want to create would tear itself apart before you come even close to your goal. Drain and aggravate the majority long enough and there will be a critical point where things erupt, violently. I would invite you to think outside the severely limiting constraints of your personal moral system and look at the world as it is and not through your ideological glasses.

You see me as an ideological enemy when in reality it is my vote that has to neutralize yours to prevent you from running this place into the ground and I'll vote in any direction necessary. That's the beauty of our democratic system, your vote is no more valid than mine and no amount of raging can change that.
It's not right-wing populist propaganda that's screwing up your day, it's the innate instinct of people for self-preservation that will keep things from progressing too far, or more appropriately -regressing- because that's where your chosen road leads to. There's no such a thing as cake unlimited, even here.

History shows that our political system works acceptably well with no particular side ever getting all powerful, things balance out by themselves. There won't be a major right-wing slide this fall because most people are very inert and rather lazy in their voting habits and many are still too politically correct for their own good (aka mass neurosis) but the entirely legit concerns of the average citizen will have an effect, hopefully enough to normalize things towards reason and away from self-destructive SJW nonsense to which there never is an end from within your own ranks.

I can't convince you but I can convince others, and I have - in RL. Just keep that in mind the next time you want to flood me with a barrage of angry slurs (as seen in a variety of threads), I'm convincing RL people on the fence whereas you're too focused on showing moral outrage about your "enemies", the SVP in particular. Which de facto are less right-wing than the SP have drifted off to the left, an often neglected circumstance.

Seeing as you surely have the capacity to understand that you won't be changing my mind without solid rational argument, I can only categorize your posts on here as attempts to distinguish yourself as a morally superior person, with no genuine interest in political realities and the benefit of the country as a whole, or the world by extension.

The tragedy here is that by being calm and honest, I'm regularly making you more angry. What you really desire is not for me to change my mind in regards to politics but for me to just shut up. You do want people posting stuff you can outrage about but you prefer it if they don't talk back after you stamp down your virtual foot because opposition prevents you from getting the narcissist supply you need. You and me, that's simply a bad combination. I'm too stubborn on my seemingly unempathic logic and you get too worked up when people don't validate and give ground to your seemingly high morals.

Listen Tranicus - oh great scammer hunter - the OP wants to discuss a very specific topic - stop fucking hijacking their thread with ALL the ills of the world. I cannot say this more plainly - let people speak to their issues and stop trying to be fucking Jesus -cause you surely are not.

Oh and maybe you should go back to walkabout cause I, for one, am sick of your multi-paragraph digressions on how you're gonna fix the world while backpacking along the coast of Australia whilst dealing with various ailments that cause you woe.

Seriously, get a job and stop living off the government/latest girl dole that you've wrangled into your "world-view"' scheme to obtain the money to survive. Oh, right.... you're too damaged to hold down a job but hey, you have plenty of time to co-opt valid OP points with your perfect solution to world hunger, world crime etc...

Yeah - fuck off :-(

Aren't there something like 45 murders per day in the US? How do we know that these murders had anything to do with them being trans or black, especially if no one knows who did it? Not that murders aren't always tragic—this just seems like it's twisting the death of these people into something political without evidence to back it up. Or am I missing something?

U.S. homicide rate: 4.5 per 100,000 (per year)
Number of U.S. transsexuals: 700,000 (commonly cited in U.S. news)
Number of U.S. black transsexuals: 88200 (12.6% of U.S. is black)
Number of U.S. black transsexuals of a particular gender: 44100 (50% male, 50% female)
Expected rate: ~2 per year
Expected number by mid August: 1.25

So a clumsy estimate suggests that black transsexuals are being killed at 10 times the U.S. average rate.

Seems to me that dtgreene has a valid concern. That is, it cannot be dismissed on the basis that lots of people are killed in America.

Probably just people noticing them more? How many people have been murdered this year in the US? If trans people make a larger percentage of them than they are in the general populace, then there may be some significance to this distinction. Otherwise it's just a matter of people discounting other deaths and paying attention to specific deaths.

Here's a report I found (linked from a reddit comment):
http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/2012_mr_ncavp_hvreport.pdf

It's a few years old (the report covers the year 2012), but it does have some statistics.

There's also a 2013 version:
http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/2013_mr_ncavp_hvreport.pdf

From the 2013 report, "Almost three-quarters (72%) of homicide victims were transgender women, and more than two-thirds (67%) of homicide victims were transgender women of color, yet transgender survivors and victims only represent 13% of total reports to NCAVP".

You don't want to know what I think about this.

Nor myself. I immediately came up with several post-worthy jokes for this thread, but I didn't want to overuse my daily limit of trigger warnings.

Not that I have anything agains't transgender people. I dislike everyone equally.

Thanks for the references.

My understanding of the figures is that they are all out of total homicides of LGBTQ people, not the total population. There were 18 cases of such homicide in 2013, according to the report. That's about 0.1% (a little more) of total homicides in the US for that year (reports of numbers vary; to take the FBI version, it's closer to 0.15%.)

So first, considering that (at least in 2011, from a page I found), 3.5% of the total US population is LGBT, it's (on average) incredibly safe to belong to this community. That page also says there were 700,000 transgenders in the US in 2011, so over 0.2% of the population, again higher than the value of under 0.1% for transgender murders. Taking the number of black transgenders, the percentage might be higher (there were more black than white murder victims in general, but not by that percent), but without knowing the percentage of black transgenders of all transgenders it's a hard to comment about that. It does seem possible that this particular ethnic group has a real problem.

Your way of voting is based on self-serving assholery, hypocisy and populism, rationalized through an extremist party that conveniently erects them as virtues. And your predictible input on every thread illustrates it. It gets funny when you play the global moral card to dismiss minority issues, while supporting the party of banking secrecy (oh it sure helps global justice), of arms exports (and all its efforts to legally bypass any arms embargo), of destruction of international human rights (in the name of nationalist sovereinty), of zero social support (gets pathetic when you self-publicize your "charity" to handicapped people while supporting the one party that opposes 93% of pro-handicap revendications).

And no, it's not about "convincing you", because pseudo-rationality is a mere hypocritical varnish on self-flattering extreme-right populism. The stakes are not on realities, the stakes are on maintaining your ideological system, without which you'd have no self-justification left for being a selfish narrow-minded ignorant prick, for cheering at demagogic SVP campaigns, and for discarding any output that doesn't come from representants of the narrow traditionalist normality you require to identify to. People who spent a bit of time learning the psychological mechanisms of extreme-right discourses know how intentions and worldview cohesion trample reflexivity there. You talking of rationality is exactly like parapsychologists using scientific-sounding terms and seeing themselves as rigorous researchers. It's your little pathetic self-representation show (fed by people who take you seriously for five minutes), but it only shields you from actual reflexivity.

So it's just about calling out your entrenched hypocrisy, with the regular facepalm it deserves.

Speaking of which, let's broaden it to OT :

I can't help smirking at the pompous pseudo-wise "why do you care, while there is also unsolved world hunger" diversion that is regularly brought up whenever a minority issue is evoked. I don't smirk for the role that differential self-identification plays in it (though it does : if there was a trend of assassination of gamers-because-gamers the outrage here would be quite different), and I don't smirk at the hypocrisy of comparing problems that are usually equally indifferent to the speakers (with often, under the surface, an implicit "this is as unimportant to me as world hunger is"). I smirk because of how many of these hypocritical "baaah get some perspective" guys lose it completely if, say, Hatred doesn't get published on GOG (oh noes heineous SJW assault on our Freedom, let's fill 60 pages of forumic hysteria for great justice). And this really hints at the actual issues hierarchisations beyond readymade dismissal excuses.

Which party do you vote for? You always complain about your political enemies, haven't seen you declare who you support with your vote. I'm 98% sure it's the SP (social democrats) who have incidentally drifted off more to the left than the SVP has drifted off to the right. Voter bases of both parties are almost equally off-center but not to an extreme level. Which would effectively neutralize your extremism argument. None of the big parties are extremist, that's simple black & white thinking on your part where you see your position as the base to which all else must be compared.

The SVP has by far the largest voter base of all parties, hardly the rogue extremist element you're trying to paint it. Even if polarization has lead to the SP shifting more to the left and the SVP shifting more to the right in recent years, Swiss people are still by and large very mellow natured. Too mellow and well meaning for their own good on the long run, I'd say. Fortunately, many are starting to realize this, a little late but not too late.

All parties bend the truth but the SVP is overall a more honest party than the SP, illustrated quite effectively by the fact that the SP are eerily silent on the big asylum issues at hand. They're just trying to sit this one out because they know how unpopular their policies are, and later on they'll feel butthurt for not getting more votes themselves and will blame the SVP and "populism" for it, as usual. Poor strategy which doesn't help solve anything. I'd rather go with the party that addresses problems and doesn't try to sweep them under the rug.

If you read my previous again, you'll see that I don't dismiss the issue at hand (= murder rate of black transgender women being on the increase which might as well be true), instead I'm more interested in explaining why SJWs such as yourself operate the way they do, offering my personal suspicions about the integrity of their motives in response to Tarnicus's [url=http://www.gog.com/forum/general/this_has_been_happening_way_too_often_nongame_related/post2]post which looked at things from an interesting macro level and I offered my thoughts on that. Feel free to disagree but your constant taking things and putting them upside down adds far less to any discussion than any off-topic tangents do.

Regarding the destruction of human rights, that's a demonstrably false accusation as it's been made very clear that what you're referring to was about defending our courts independence so that we can keep applying our laws autonomously without having the EU dictate international laws on us.
There is no evil conspiracy here with plans to make cooking babies or anything like that legal which would make circumventing international law necessary. In case you haven't noticed, we're not a banana republic that tortures prisoners etc so we don't need anyone on the outside to find excuses for trying to control us better.

Regarding zero social support, another false accusation. How are we to have a serious discussion if you see everything as zero or one, nothing in between? Not a single party aims for that.
I can spend a couple hours taking up the discussion about bank secrecy, arms exports and the details of IV revisions (disabled support policies) but looking at the way you throw around those topics without any differentiation or regard for facts that anyone can easily google, I'm bound to see your remarks as self-serving outrage.

I already addressed the fallacy of extremism above. Incidentally, I wouldn't even have to bring any arguments for that as you didn't technically make any points that need countering, just throwing labels around gratuitously (which isn't very progressive btw).

It appears you're simply transmitting the neoprogressive ideas that you learned at university from biased professors without processing these ideas much or at all. Using all those fancy words like reflexivity equates to theoretical education which in this case seems to be more about indoctrination than intelligence. Almost all the young people I personally know who currently attend university identify as leftists or center left (why? social proof is more important to young people, hence they don't want to be divergent) and even they tell me that the faculty in the humane sciences is almost completely far left. Freedom of thought no longer seems to be a virtue in the humane sciences and that is a shame. I kinda feel sorry for you but then again, there is no excuse for adopting the mentality of your former environment, you have free will after all.

If I must choose between your sociology theories from books and on the other side my personal observations and experiences from traveling, working in the tourism industry, painting on the street for hours on end, drawing countless people and hearing their stories and casually chatting with strangers in RL, then I'll gladly go with the latter. I also like to dig through historical chronicles and analyze statistics for the fun of it, all things that I find more helpful than theoretical sociology stuff. "But it's intellectual"? Haha, no thanks in that case!

You want to outrage for the sake of outraging, and even though I can't prove it I seriously doubt you truly care for minorities, in the case of the topic of this thread black transgender women. I see no love for minorities in your posts, only hate for the majority. This is just circumstantial evidence against you, no hard proof and that's why I try to word myself carefully to make sure that it is clear when I'm talking subjectively and when I'm relating facts that one can look up in the statistics online. Admittedly, it's impossible to word myself carefully enough for you not to take everything out of context and distorting it so perhaps I could make due with less effort.

I'm also not seeing you make any constructive suggestions on how to make the world a better place. I don't have the answers on how to make the world perfect but I sure intend to not make my current location worse via some twisted reality-disregarding policies that don't help anyone on the long run (neither minorities or majority) but ultimately screw up things for everybody, with a proven historical record.

Btw: I was against the leftist motion for minimum guaranteed income of 4000 Swiss Francs per month for every person here, whether they work or not (!). I've lost jobs due to work injuries and been unemployed before and I could have profited off a 4000 Francs income on the short run as that is astronomically more than I make. I support the welfare system for the poor, elderly and disabled as I've said before but within the confines of realism, not insane fantasy. Authoritarian redistribution of wealth can be made to work to an extent but needs to have a -clear- limit at some point. Trying to finance everyone who shows up here is simply not within our capabilities.

There's no law against facepalming, you can facepalm all day long if it makes you happy.
Problems arise when you start spreading false information on these forums, as demonstrated by the constant black & white statements like "SVP wants destruction of international human rights", "SVP are extremists who hate disabled people", "awalterj is a moron" (<- my favorite!) and so on.

I'll exercise my freedom of speech to correct you when you're making statements that are demonstrably false. The pattern is always the same: First, you'll bring a one-liner or two and when that fails to silence the wretched enemies of yours then comes the longer barrage of nasty insults which I suspect is a strategy to make people not reply to you and it most often seems to work, same way as people on the bus move out of the way when someone smells really badly.

I probably should know better than to get involved in this, but here's a suggestion: If you feel the need to throw insults at other forum members, potentially turning this thread into some personal flamewar, you might want to consider shouting at each other via private messages instead.

This kind of behavior really doesn't make you look good, nor is it a positive contribution to this thread or the rest of the forum.
... While I'm at it, you two as well. If you and Telika are just going to argue with each other, with much of it being off-topic, why not take it to private messages?